What India should learn from the Test series

The BCCI needs to get serious about planning and preparation, says Jamie Aulter

Even a cursory glance across the newspapers and news channels in the days since India’s 319-run thrashing in the Trent Bridge Test – which left he visitors 0-2 down in the four-match series – could have you believe that the national team’s misfortunes are more important than the USA’s last-gasp deal to avoid a federal debt default.

“India annihilated,” said TheHindustan Times, having “list match and face”. “India don’t deserve to be No. 1” screamed The Times of India, while The Indian Express slammed a “jaded, ill-prepared, jaded side”. The Mail Today splashed one word across its sports pages: “Pathetic.”

Yes, India were whooped in Nottingham, and crushed by 196 runs at Lord’s – the first time since 2008 that they’ve been beaten in consecutive Tests. They’ve looked undercooked, underprepared and frankly, a little lost. But all is not lost. With Virender Sehwag, Gautam Gambhir and Zaheer Khan back, they will be a lot stronger. India did not reach the top spot in Tests by fluke: there was a process, hard work, and some sparkling fightbacks from precarious positions.

The Test series, and the No. 1 ranking, can be salvaged – of that there should be no doubt. But in the long run, this team, and more importantly the men who run Indian cricket, can learn a lot from these few tumultuous weeks on tour.

First, it is harder to stay at the top than to get there. For all the talk of this Indian side being the best and emulating Steve Waugh’s and Ricky Ponting’s Australian teams, the BCCI must understand the importance of planning. This tour had a shoddy itinerary: one practice match ahead of arguably the most anticipated series since the Ashes? Before the tour, players were playing hard in the IPL, and those that weren’t injured or fatigued travelled to the West Indies. Most arrived in England jaded.

What this series lacked was an intelligible approach by the BCCI. Most of the team played two Tests in two weeks – in the Caribbean and England – and that’s the fault of the Indian administrators. It was shocking to see that Zaheer bowled just ten overs in the practice match against Somerset, coming off a long injury period. MS Dhoni needed more time in English conditions too: his repeated fumbling of the ball was evidence enough of that.

India can take a cue from England and Australia, who know who they’ll be playing in Tests a year from now. Prioritizing is the key, as Nasser Hussain and Sourav Ganguly have pointed out. The BCCI has tried to fit more Tests into the calendar, but the focus is on limited-overs cricket, especially Twenty20. This marquee Test series was not prioritized.

After a 5-0 Ashes whitewash in 2007, England set a goal to become the world’s top Test team. They got a new coach, chucked out certain players, and planned towards 2009. They built a fierce support staff, handed out only 11 player contracts, worked on their pace attack, and picked bowlers who could bat. Two years later, they retained the Ashes. Amid celebrations, their captain talked about the return leg and how England were planning towards it. Come late 2010, England landed nearly a month before the first Ashes Test, with a squad of 16 backup players to show how serious they were. They won the Ashes.

Conversely, India played the World Cup and IPL back-to-back, were shunted off to the Caribbean, and then landed in England. Fatigued? You bet. And after this tour? The Champions League Twenty20, one-dayers at home against England, a tour to Australia, and a full series at home against West Indies. Instead of going red-faced at the Decision Review System, the BCCI should focus its energy on securing India’s place at the top of the Test ladder.

If India come back at Edgbaston and The Oval, much of the above will be forgotten, because the media and the public’s memory is short. Let’s hope the same isn’t the case for India’s cricket administrators.